The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

With both parties 'coming to play' during last night’s debate, everyone will likely have their own opinion as to who emerged the victor—if anyone.

While the President edged out a win in the “insta-polls”, Governor Romney likely did little to derail his base or to send them into the same state of depression experienced by supporters of the President following his first debate debacle. However some opinions will count more than others when extrapolating the impact of the debate come election day and the opinions that will matter the most will be that of suburban women—the Holy Grail of the 2012 presidential election.

So who scored with the women—not just on the social issues that have been at the forefront of the political debate during in recent years but with the equally important (if not more so) question of women and the economy?

Romney appears to have done a good job in tying the interests of women to his claim that he’s the right candidate to get the economy humming again. He did this by focusing his argument on how more women live in poverty today than when the President arrived in office and arguing that a poor economy is the greatest threat to the security of women.

This approach is likely to score with women as polling data reveals that women are more concerned with the economy than women’s social issues such as abortion.

However, I thought a great deal was revealed when each candidate responded to the question of income inequality, particularly as applied to women in America.

Governor Romney began by making a pitch for his efforts to bring women into his cabinet when he was Governor of Massachusetts—a pitch that gave rise to the number one social media meme of the evening as Romney asserted that his staff was provided with “binders full of women” for the Governor to consider for cabinet positions. While the answer may have shown that he had a concern for a more balanced cabinet in Massachusetts, it said nothing about a woman’s right to equal pay.

The Romney responses went downhill from there.

Rather than focus on the important question of women receiving equal pay for equal work, Romney chose to frame his answers in the light of creating policies that permitted women to have the sort of adjustable schedule that would get them home in time for dinner.

Certainly, it is helpful to both men and women to have a more flexible work schedule to better permit parents to help one another out with the important challenges they face when it comes to performing in the workplace while taking care of business at home.

But Governor Romney’s answer appeared to say two things that were disturbing.

First, Mr. Romney yet again completely avoided the question of women receiving equal pay in the workplace as if getting home from work early is all that concerns working women. Secondly, Romney’s answer appeared to suggest that the home is the primary province of the woman and that men, somehow, need be less concerned about being able to spend time with their families and doing the household chores—not to mention being more available so that the working wife can deal more effectively with her own responsibilities in the workplace.